Case makers in the Far East have begun to produce accessories they hope will fit a new low-cost iPhone model from Apple, featuring a slightly thicker design and rounded edges.

The appearance of a case alleged to fit a new iPhone would suggest that schematics for such a device, legitimate or not, are in the wild. Photos and video of the accessory were highlighted on Tuesday by Macotakara.

The case designed by Japan's MGM Corp. shows rounded edges, and a slightly thicker frame than the iPhone 5. It includes space for a rear-facing camera with flash, as well as volume buttons and mute switch on the left side.

According to the report, the case for the low-cost iPhone is about 2 millimeters thicker than a similar accessory designed for the iPhone 5. The iPhone 5 case also has squared off edges, while the low-cost iPhone case has rounded sides.

Rumors have persisted throughout 2013 that Apple plans to build a new, low-end iPhone model that could be used to target customers who prefer not to sign a new service contract. Currently Apple does not serve the low end of the smartphone market, where the most industry growth is being seen.

In recent weeks, reports have claimed that suppliers are now shipping parts for such a device. One alleged part claimed to show a plastic rear shell with rounded corners allegedly intended for the device.

Market watchers believe Apple could sell a low-cost iPhone for $399 without negatively affecting the company's margins. It's also been suggested the device will be available in an array of colors, taking a cue from the company's iPod lineup.

I remember those guys from last year. They showed legitimate iphone 5 components ahead of the launch. With the amount of leaks we have on iphones parts and accessories they got to be manufacturing them right now. Maybe the low cost phone will launch this summer ahead of the high end iphone 5s

Apple can release a lower cost iPhone without sacrificing quality. It has done so with its iPod line. For instance, the iPod, iPod Nano, and iPod Shuffle. The Macbook, and Macbook Air. All these products have different price points, and distinguishing features.

If Apple wants to be competitivein other markets, it needs more options. The less expensive phone for pay as you go carriers will be nice, but Apple really needs a larger phone if it wants to truly continue to compete worldwide.

"We can never be sure that the opinion we are endeavoring to stifle is a false opinion; and if we were sure, stifling it would be an evil still."

- John Stuart Mill

"If liberty means anything at all it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear."

Maybe you are thinking of the US market only? In a lot of countries, an iphone is months of salaries. The low cost iphone is primaly for emerging markets, not to mention the design should fit there needs better.

Another aspect of it is the ecosystem. Below a certain point Apple will become a niche market, exactly like they did in the 80's with the PC market. Once there is pretty much game over. Seriously if Apple makes the same mistake twice, they should run out of business, they deserved it.

and yet, another used for it would be countries with no subsidize phones. not to mention that even in Canada and the US, the carriers are trying everything they can to reduce subsidies.

Finally, a low cost iphone doesnt mean its going to be a piece of garbage.... It may be a very usefull and well design device that integrates with iOS avoiding market segmentations in OS versions.

I agree that they don't necessarily have to sacrifice quality but I'm still of the opinion that the only way to make a significant drop in price is to sacrifice margins.

Depends. The high end iphone is using a lot of cutting edge components that are very expensive. By toning down everything but keeping the device compatible with the lastest apps and iOS versions, you can cut the cost a lot.

I do think the low cost iphone could sell well even if its price include a little premium over other low cost phone. That little premium is all margins and will make the diffence between no profit and decent margins.

They must do something for about 70% of the world that just cant afford current iphone models.

I do think the low cost iphone could sell well even if its price include a little premium over other low cost phone. That little premium is all margins and will make the diffence between no profit and decent margins.

This I agree with totally. When I think of low cost iPhone I don't think bargain basement price, just cheaper than the current offerings.

Still, I can't help feel that something has to give, even if it is only offered in markets other than NA and Europe... features, margins, quality.

Odd that you would know he was banned if you were not reading the forums. It also seems in poor taste insulting somebody who is not around to defend himself.

Apple can release a lower cost iPhone without sacrificing quality. It has done so with its iPod line. For instance, the iPod, iPod Nano, and iPod Shuffle. The Macbook, and Macbook Air. All these products have different price points, and distinguishing features.

If Apple wants to be competitive in other markets, it needs more options. The less expensive phone for pay as you go carriers will be nice, but Apple really needs a larger phone if it wants to truly continue to compete worldwide.

"We can never be sure that the opinion we are endeavoring to stifle is a false opinion; and if we were sure, stifling it would be an evil still."

- John Stuart Mill

"If liberty means anything at all it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear."

- George Orwell

If apple can build a low cost iPhone without sacrificing margins or quality, that would be great, but that's not what we are hearing from the rumors. What we are hearing is that they are going to sacrifice build quality. This sounds like the thinking of an analyst (plastic feels cheap therefore it must be made of plastic to be cheap), and it's so thoroughly un-apple like that it causes me to think that these rumors are BS.

As far as cheap iPhones go, what's wrong with the 4/4s? They may not be as cheap as people want them to be, but neither was the iPad mini. The fact is that a cheap iPhone will never be as cheap as people want because apple doesn't care about having the cheapest devices on the market; they care about having the best. As for a larger screen; apple has explained why they don't want to go larger, and the device that would fit in the case shown couldn't have a screen much larger than an iPhone 5 anyway.

I can possibly seeing them updating the 4/4s the same way they did with the iPad 3 in order to give it a lightning connector in the process giving them an iPhone 5 screen, but that's about it.

It probably will be just a bit cheaper than the 4S but not much. Rather than selling last year's phone as the cheap one, they'll have an up to date one with less "jewelry" engineering. MacBook vs MacBook Pro. This is necessary because of china. They have to make a phone with tdlte, so relying on on the 5 won't cut it.

I'm not convinced it's going to merely be a low-cost iPhone. Why would they do that? How would they differentiate between this and the regular iPhone? "It's the same, but cheaper." What a great advertising campaign, and talk about cannibalism.

With the other lines they may offer lower cost products in the same family, but that's not what differentiates them from the other models, it's functionality. The iPod Shuffle is different from the iPod Nano is different from the iPod Classic is different from the iPod Touch, and they happen to all have different price points.

If this phone is real, it'll be functionally different from the other iPhone, and most likely, significantly different. Apple is not, in my opinion, about to release a product with current or older internals that performs the same basic functionality as the current iPhone - that would make no sense.

What they might do is something really innovative, and create a phone (for example) that doesn't have cellular capabilities, but only accepts a data-only SIM, so any communication would be via iMessage or FaceTime (or any of the other myriad great apps out there). If they merely want a cheaper iPhone, they have one, they can just update the iP4 with new connector and elongated screen and call it a day, or offer an 8GB iP5, like they did with the iPod Touch recently. Those would both be cheaper iPhones - they aren't going to make an entirely new phone with vastly different internals and casing so they can offer a cheaper phone. I don't see it that way.

It depends on what they think is low cost..... $100 to $200 for an unlocked phone is low cost, but Apple may be replacing their $450 iPhone 4 with a new, updated $349 small screen iPhone 5 would probably be something they might do.

If they came out with a A6 based iPhone 4/4S replacement that has a Retina display, 8G storage, with a less expensive case design that's $350 price range for an unlocked phone, why not? That might be what Apple MIGHT do. That would be plausible and possible, but it would still be profitable and still a usable phone as they could still offer it on a 2 year service contract or at least try to figure out a way to get them in the hands of a lot of people.

It all depends how inexpensive they can make them while still making a decent product that will run iOS 7 with all of the features.

From the video, the case they showed looked like a cheap iPhone 5 case. The rounded corners on the outside is not that big of a deal, it's how it fits the unit on the inside. But it just looked like a cheap case that did fit the iPhone 5.

Apple can release a lower cost iPhone without sacrificing quality. It has done so with its iPod line. For instance, the iPod, iPod Nano, and iPod Shuffle. The Macbook, and Macbook Air. All these products have different price points, and distinguishing features.

If Apple wants to be competitive in other markets, it needs more options. The less expensive phone for pay as you go carriers will be nice, but Apple really needs a larger phone if it wants to truly continue to compete worldwide.

Apple is very competitive with its three iPhone models. The other devices Apple sells have room to shrink with trade offs. I can't imagine an iPhone that is significantly lighter than the 5 or doesn't have a screen, access to apps, a camera, etc. Apple will not use substandard parts or "cheap" materials.

Quote:

Originally Posted by herbapou

Maybe you are thinking of the US market only? In a lot of countries, an iphone is months of salaries. The low cost iphone is primaly for emerging markets, not to mention the design should fit there needs better.

Another aspect of it is the ecosystem. Below a certain point Apple will become a niche market, exactly like they did in the 80's with the PC market. Once there is pretty much game over. Seriously if Apple makes the same mistake twice, they should run out of business, they deserved it.

and yet, another used for it would be countries with no subsidize phones. not to mention that even in Canada and the US, the carriers are trying everything they can to reduce subsidies.

Finally, a low cost iphone doesnt mean its going to be a piece of garbage.... It may be a very usefull and well design device that integrates with iOS avoiding market segmentations in OS versions.

Please, the PC and cell phone markets are different. There is no niche with the iPhone. If anything, a phablet is a niche product.

There is a tremendous amount of lack of understanding here. Hopefully I can bring some sanity and critical thinking to this discussion:

The Low Cost iPhone: What You Need To Know

This term, "low-cost iPhone" has been thrown around since basically a month after the launch of the first iPhone. It has persisted as a rumor since around the time of the 3GS. Yet, it has no definition. It has no real meaning. Every person interprets this to mean something different, and thus a total lack of comprehension ensues. Allow me to spell out a few things regarding the "low-cost iPhone"

First of all, there is no such thing as a low cost iPhone. Just as we saw with the iPad mini, there is no such thing as a low cost iPad. To get the cost down, you have to remove hundreds of dollars worth of components......at which point......it is no longer an iPad, or an iPhone.

So, what can this actually mean then? Well, a CONTRACT-FREE iPhone is NOT the same as a LOW COST iPhone. I'm tired of this delusion that buying an iPhone off contract somehow saves you money and equates to the low cost option...NO. All it does it gives you the freedom to STOP using and thus STOP paying for your iPhone...wtf is the point of that? Can anyone tell me? Why on earth would you do that? Yes I can imagine unexpected, extremely rare, niche scenarios in which stopping service to your iPhone is desired. But that is neither here nor there. You buy an iPhone to use it.

So, again, what does it mean to get a "low cost iPhone"? Because I can tell you right now, there is not one living soul that would agree that paying $399 up front for their iPhone, and then an average of $75-$100 a month for service, equates to "low-cost". Not in any way shape or form. You cannot spin that to make any sense.

However, is $99 up front and then the same monthly cost, by comparison, "low-cost"? You bet your sweet behind it is. Every American between the ages of 18 and 45 would see that as the "low-cost" option when the two are compared. Even though in the latter option, you are signing a 2 year contract...you are receiving a carrier subsidy of nearly $500. That is money that you DO NOT have to pay back. You have to pay for monthly service on the device, which is necessary to use it, prepaid or post-paid makes no difference here. You can make the lame argument that off contract there may be cheaper monthly plans, but I have not seen real evidence of this, nor has it ever worked out to be significant savings. Negligible, is the word.

So...here we are....bloggers journalists and users alike....totally and completely taken in by the idea of a "low-cost" iPhone.....when it already exists....sort of. Today, it's called the iPhone 4S. Last year it was called the iPhone 4. Before that it was called the iPhone 3GS. Getting it yet?

However, I have been under the impression that Apple was going to deviate slightly from this routine, and I believe this year is the year. If things remain on the routine path, Apple will release the iPhone 5S as the flagship iPhone, and keep the 5 around at $99.

Instead, this year, Apple has been hard at work designing a "New" $99 iPhone to sell, instead of demoting the 5. The new $99 iPhone will feature most of what the iPhone 5 features, with certain things tweaked/added/removed to accommodate their design. It will of course, come in colors.

Just as there always is, there will be more than enough to differentiate between the flagship device and the new cheaper device. And it will be perfectly suited to become a new category of iPhone. One that remains year after year, and gets updated alongside the flagship iPhone. No more selling "last year's iPhone" at a reduced price. Apple will instead shape a "new" product around it each year....as most people have no idea except what they can see.

Remember people, selling last year's iPhone at half price has been VERY popular and successful for Apple....because of the price. Imagine how much more successful it will be when the price is the same, but it is perceived as a "new" product. The answer...VERY VERY.

There is a tremendous amount of lack of understanding here. Hopefully I can bring some sanity and critical thinking to this discussion:... and then a bunch of stuff after this...

I think that everything you said has been said a hundred times before... but, in this case, I believe that "low cost iPhone" means something totally different than a subsidized older or rejigged model.

All of this discussion about Apple’s iPhone plans is good and all, but what just happened with the MacPro was completely unforeseen by all. So that makes me a bit cautious about the past being proof of the future. (Granted the MacPro is somewhat of a niche product compared to the iPhone, but still)

General consensus seems to be

Option a) Apple goes along with the release of an updated iPhone, the 5s and offers the iP5 + iP4s on the cheap

So...here we are....bloggers journalists and users alike....totally and completely taken in by the idea of a "low-cost" iPhone.....when it already exists....sort of. Today, it's called the iPhone 4S. Last year it was called the iPhone 4. Before that it was called the iPhone 3GS. Getting it yet?

Obviously you're missing the point of 'low cost'. In the U.S., a low cost phone purchased from a major carrier makes no sense since the total cost is only marginally different.

What people are envisioning with a 'low cost" phone would be something like:
Unlocked base iPhone - $300 - plus $45 per month, 2 year total of $1380 (Straight Talk, Net 10)

Keep in mind that this is much closer to the situation in much of the world where they don't have the rate scheme like the US where there's little advantage to buying a cheaper phone. And if you keep the phone past the contract expiration, it gets even worse. In countries where phones are not subsidized by the carriers, the difference between a $300 phone and a $649 phone is very significant.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

So, again, what does it mean to get a "low cost iPhone"? Because I can tell you right now, there is not one living soul that would agree that paying $399 up front for their iPhone, and then an average of $75-$100 a month for service, equates to "low-cost". Not in any way shape or form. You cannot spin that to make any sense.

However, is $99 up front and then the same monthly cost, by comparison, "low-cost"? You bet your sweet behind it is. Every American between the ages of 18 and 45 would see that as the "low-cost" option when the two are compared.

The keyword above is "American", this is where your argument falls apart. The low cost phone isn't targeted at the US. In many countries, you can get a service provider starting at about $15/month, IF it's not subsidising the phone. So $350 for the Low Cost iphone, plus $15/month, is VASTLY cheaper than your model ($99 for a 4S up front and then $75/month for 2 years). Do the math.

Well, there are all sorts of people out there. Tallest is banned but someone will replace him. I know I have ignored people plenty of times. I rarely feel strong enough about the things I post on this forum to get upset over them. You can't do anything about the other person, but you can control how you handle the situation and treat them with the respect they refuse to show you.

It really depends on your prospective. It will likely be a premium phone when it is compared to the smartphones that compete directly against it in the markets they intend to target. The word "premium" is relative and depends on who your competition is. If you look at all the cell phones in the world as one giant market, then I guess Apple is making a cheap phone. If you break it down into individual markets, the way I believe Apple does, they are releasing a premium phone targeted to a specific market.

Anyway... back to the low-cost iPhone... which I think will happen... for China Mobile.

China, India and Brazil are huge markets potential if apple could offer something there that is appealing to more than 2% of the population. Even in developped markets, EU could used a less than $400 iphone that is NOT the previous model.

I wish they would focus on a phone that is meant for daily use - the 5s is a great design but scratches so easily and the soft metal doesn't help either. Forcing me to protect in a case really goes against the design....

Well, there are all sorts of people out there. You can't do anything about the other person, but you can control how you handle the situation and treat them with the respect they refuse to show you.

It will likely be a premium phone when it is compared to the smartphones that compete directly against it in the markets they intend to target. The word "premium" is relative and depends on who your competition is.

Well, there are all sorts of people out there. Tallest is banned but someone will replace him. I know I have ignored people plenty of times. I rarely feel strong enough about the things I post on this forum to get upset over them. You can't do anything about the other person, but you can control how you handle the situation and treat them with the respect they refuse to show you.

It really depends on your prospective. It will likely be a premium phone when it is compared to the smartphones that compete directly against it in the markets they intend to target. The word "premium" is relative and depends on who your competition is. If you look at all the cell phones in the world as one giant market, then I guess Apple is making a cheap phone. If you break it down into individual markets, the way I believe Apple does, they are releasing a premium phone targeted to a specific market.

Great advice......for all of us....but there are times when a response is needed...but under control and by the rules...

Tallest Skil:

"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse" "The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."

If I had to guess Island I would say an A5 or A5x, it wouldn't seem they would drop an A6 in it as that would be for the mid tier model iPhone 5. I'm assuming the next iPhone will have an A6x or A7 chip.

It really depends on your prospective. It will likely be a premium phone when it is compared to the smartphones that compete directly against it in the markets they intend to target. The word "premium" is relative and depends on who your competition is. If you look at all the cell phones in the world as one giant market, then I guess Apple is making a cheap phone. If you break it down into individual markets, the way I believe Apple does, they are releasing a premium phone targeted to a specific market.

I agree this is the way to look at it, well said. The "cheap" Apple phone will probably stand out in some way like the (cheap) iPad mini did.

Quote:

Well, there are all sorts of people out there. Tallest is banned but someone will replace him. I know I have ignored people plenty of times. I rarely feel strong enough about the things I post on this forum to get upset over them. You can't do anything about the other person, but you can control how you handle the situation and treat them with the respect they refuse to show you.

Replace him? Don't know about that, he was, is, one of a kind, seems to me. I enjoyed the thrust and parry when it came to the obvious trolling, but I think the job of being forum cop got to him after a while. He was the mod who consistently went after the trolls. Trouble is he went after others too.

The point is that finally we are beginning to see some variety in plans and options that we never had before. An iPhone with the guts of a 4S but with lightning and possibly a 4" screen to unify the platform on that size would sell very well and still allow a nice margin to Apple.

China, India and Brazil are huge markets potential if apple could offer something there that is appealing to more than 2% of the population. Even in developped markets...

This is the problem. You cannot restrict sales of a 'low cost' phone to emerging markets.

Soon, people will opt to buy the lower-cost version over the top-of-the-line (or parents will buy the top, and kids will get low-cost).

Two things will happen: Apple's ASP and average margins will sink like a stone, affecting its valuation (at least 50% of which is currently from iPhones); Apple will be swamped with a multitude of low-end consumers that, frankly, it will not know how to deal with, since their needs, consuming habits, online habits, etc. will be very different from that of its current consumer.

Tim Cook is gay, believes in climate change, and cares deeply about racial equality. Deal with it (and please spare us if you can't).

Great advice......for all of us....but there are times when a response is needed...but under control and by the rules...

Well certainly. I didn't say ignore everything and never respond. Just know when to quit and when to be the better person. There comes a point when you're just wasting your time and the conversation can go nowhere but downhill.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flaneur

Maybe he'll come back in another, more circumspect incarnation.

Not the first forum he's been banned from. I think he likes to move on and find fresh blood, though he might be running out of Apple forums to hang around at this point.

This is the problem. You cannot restrict sales of a 'low cost' phone to emerging markets.

Soon, people will opt to buy the lower-cost version over the top-of-the-line (or parents will buy the top, and kids will get low-cost).

Two things will happen: Apple's ASP and average margins will sink like a stone, affecting its valuation (at least 50% of which is currently from iPhones); Apple will be swamped with a multitude of low-end consumers that, frankly, it will not know how to deal with, since their needs, consuming habits, online habits, etc. will be very different from that of its current consumer.

Just to get it out of the way, they can restrict it by not agreeing to let carriers sell it. If Apple didn't make agreements with any US carriers, that would limit its availability to imported, unlocked phones, and I hardly think people will by clamoring to get their hands on the unlocked, cheaper iPhone from China. I just don't see it. People can already buy iPhone 4S for cheap or get a 4 for free under contract.

Let's assume they sell the iPhone in the US as an unlocked or prepaid device (I really don't see this being available under contract). Paying $299 for a phone is still a hefty price tag. There are plenty of cheaper Android phones. If you are the type of person you describe (cheap, low-end), I think you'll get an Android phone for $199 or less. So, for an unlocked or prepaid phone, iPhone is still carries a premium price.

I really don't see why some people hate this phone. Apple built a smaller, cheaper Mac (the Mac Mini). They built a smaller, cheaper iPod (iPod Nano). They built a smaller, cheaper iPad (iPad Mini). Everyone is acting like this new territory when it is simply Apple doing what it always does.

Just to get it out of the way, they can restrict it by not agreeing to let carriers sell it. If Apple didn't make agreements with any US carriers, that would limit its availability to imported, unlocked phones, and I hardly think people will by clamoring to get their hands on the unlocked, cheaper iPhone from China. I just don't see it. People can already buy iPhone 4S for cheap or get a 4 for free under contract.

Let's assume they sell the iPhone in the US as an unlocked or prepaid device (I really don't see this being available under contract). Paying $299 for a phone is still a hefty price tag. There are plenty of cheaper Android phones. If you are the type of person you describe (cheap, low-end), I think you'll get an Android phone for $199 or less. So, for an unlocked or prepaid phone, iPhone is still carries a premium price.

I really don't see why some people hate this phone. Apple built a smaller, cheaper Mac (the Mac Mini). They built a smaller, cheaper iPod (iPod Nano). They built a smaller, cheaper iPad (iPad Mini). Everyone is acting like this new territory when it is simply Apple doing what it always does.

You make a valid argument, better than most.

You changed my opinion ... good job sir.

Life is not measured by the breaths you take, but the moments that take your breath away. - GC